DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 259 680 HE 018 608

AUTHOR Lozier, G. Gregory; Chittipeddi, KumarTITLE Issues Management and the Role of Strategic Planning.

AIR 1985 Annual Forum Paper.PUB DATE May 85NOTE 22p.; Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the

Association for Institutional Research (25th,Portland, OR, April 28-May 1, 1985).

PUB TYPE Reports - Descriptive (141) -- Speeches/ConferencePapers (150)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Change Strategies; College Administration; *College

Planning; Decision Making; *Economic Factors;Educational Change; Higher Education; PolicyFormation; *Political Influences; Population Trends;Social Change; State Universities; TechnologicalAdvancement; *Trend Analysis

IDENTIFIERS *AIR Forum; Environmental Scanning; IssuesManagement; Pennsylvania State University; *StrategicPlanning

ABSTRACTThe integration of issues management into the

institutional strategic planning process at Pennsylvania StateUniversity is discussed. The significance of issues management as anorganizational process is also considered. Stages of the issuesmanagement process are: (1) scanning the external environment toidentify strategic issues; (2) analyzing these issues for likelyimpact and probability of occurrence; and (3) developing suitableresponses for managing the issues. The usefulness of issuesmanagement stems from its potential to act as an early detector ofsignificant external trends, and to provide the mechanisms fordeveloping effective strategies to respond. In addition to planningby the traditional organizational structure, issues managementpermits cross-unit planning. An early aspect of the strategicmanagement process at Pennsylvania State University was theinitiation of a macro-level external assessment. Six assessmentcommittees were appointed: population trends, economic trends,federal and state policies, societal, technological and scientifictrends, graduate and research markets, and changing higher educationstructure and competition. Later annual planning will require unitlevel scanning and micro-level external assessments by lower-levelplanning units. (SW)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

0

co

LC(NI

Issues Management

and the Role of Strategic Planning

0

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION

CENTER tERICI

&Ohm document has been reproduced as

received horn the person or organization

originating it.Mitior change., have been made to improve

reproduction quality

Points of veto., or opinionsstated in this docu

meat do not necessarilyrepresent official NIE

posilemoloolicv

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

AIR

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

G. Gregory LoxierExecutive Director

Kumar ChittipeddiResearch Assistant

Office of Panning and AnalysisThe Pennsylvania State University

University Park, PA 16802

Paper presented at the Twenty-fifth Annual Forum of the Association

for Institutional Research, Portland, OR, April 28-May 1, 1985.

THE ASSOCIATION FOR INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH

This paper was presented at the Twenty-FifthAnnual Forum of the Association for InstitutionalResearch held at the Portland Hilton in Portland,Oregon, April 28-May 1, 1985. This paper wasreviewed by the AIR Forum Publications Committeeand was judged to'be of high quality and of interestto others concerned with the research of highereducation. It has therefore been selected to beincluded in the ERIC Collection of Forum papers.

Elizabeth F. Fox, ChairForum Publications EditorialAdvisory Committee

ISSUES MANAGEMENT AO THE ROLE OF STRATEGIC PLANNING

C. Gregory LozierKumar Chittipeddi

The Pennsylvania State University

Abstract

The concept of issues management is gaining the increasing attentionof both researchers and practitioners in the field of strategic planning.issues management--which is concerned with the identification, analysis,probability, and timing of a developing issue, and organizationalresponse--can spell the difference between success and failure of theplanning effort. This paper delineates the attempt of a major publicuniversity to Integrate issues management into the institutionalstrategic planning process. The intent is to make issues management anongoing.and systematic organizational exercise.

1

The authors have been actively involved in the development and

implementation of a strategic planning process for The Pennsylvania State

University. Although the early formulation of the specific process did

not utilize the issues] management rubric, we have concluded that strategic

planning is better defined and understood when considered in the context

of issues management concepts. Our purpose in this paper is to offer some

insights on the significance of issues management as an organizational' process,

and on its relationship to the more comprehensive notion of strategic planning,

and to discuss the preliminary methodology adopted at our university for

incorporating issues management into the strategic planning process.

Definition

We begin with a working definition of issues management - -a synthesis

of the major ideas found in the literature:

4

Issues management is an ongoing organizational process concernedwith the identification of issues that might impact upon thestrategic directions of the organization, the analysis of theseissues to establish their relevance to the organization and thelikelihood of their occurrence, and the development of appropriateorganizational responses to. these issues. Furthermore, issuesmanagement process is one component of the strategic planning process.

This definition implies that there are several stages in the issues manage

ment process: 1) scanning the external environment to identify strategic

issues; 2) analyzing these issues for likely impact and probability of

occurrence; and 3) developing suitable responses for managing the issues.

As with most organizational science conr.ppts (e.g., leadership, power,

and authority), there is not unanimity among issues management proponents about

its definition. One point of difference relates to the scope of issues

to be subsumed under the issues management mantle, i.e., whether the range

of issues should be global or comprehensive in nature, or should be

restricted to those issues deemed strategic to an organization. We have

adopted the latter point of view. A:shley (1983) offers the following

definition of a strategic issue:

An external development which could impact the organization'sperformance; To which the organization must respond in an orderlyfashion; Over which the organization may reasonably expect toexert some influence (p. 11).

There are two majur reasons for adopting this "limited scope"

position. The first reason stems from the major premise underlying strategic

planning, that the effectiveness of the organization is contingent upon

the degree to which it is attuned to its external environment. We see

issues management as being a pivotal element in this attunement process,

As Freeman (1984) has pointed out: "The key to success for issue management

. . . must be its ability to surface and track real issues that affect

the strategic direction of the corporation or business unit . . ." (p. 221).

The second reason is based upon the recognition of cognitive and

motivational limitations to human and organizational information pro-

cessing capabilities (March and Simon, 1958; Cyert and March, 1963). Theories

on individual decision making have revealed the biases that are inherent

in human information processing, and the relationship between information

overload and the distortions in decision mal:ing wuristics (Tversky and

Kahneman, 1980)0 Is:Ales management must, therefore, deal with a narrower

spectrum of issues so as to minimize the negative consequences of information

overload and the idiosyncrasies of human decision making.

The other aspect of the argument on the issues tanagement definition

hinges on the comprehensiveness of the process, i.e., whether the issues

management process should he defined to include identification, diagnosis,

relevance to organization, and development of appropriate responses, or

whether it refers solely to the issue resolution aspects of f!ge process. Our

position on this debate is consistent with that of Ashley (1983) who has

suggested that the process encompasses all aspects of identification,

analysis, and control.

Significance

The usefulness of the issues management process stems from its

potential to act as an early detector of significant external trends, and

to provide the mechanisms for developing effective strategies to respond to

those trends. According to Dutton, Fahey, and Narayanan (1983), issues

management, or what they have labeled as strategic issue diagnosis (SID),

"affects both the process and content of subsequent phases of strategic

decision making" (p. 31)8). The issues management process must, therefore,

be linked to the more comprehensive strategic planning process in order

to be effective.

Linkage with Strategic Planninp.Management

While Porl.; researchers make a distinction between the terms strategic

planning and strategic management (e.g., Hofer, et al., 1930; pp. 1-7),

our own preference is to view these terms interchangeably. According to

Schendel and Hofer (1979), there are six major components in the strategic

planning /management process: (1) goal formulation; (2) environmental analysis;

(3) strategy formulation; (4) strategy evaluation; (5) strategy imple-

mentation; and (6) strategic control (p. 14). Our conceptualization of

the linkage between issues management and strategic management is presented

in Figure 1.

Insert Figure 1 about here

As Figure 1 indicates, issues management describes the integration of

the environmental analysis into the organization's strategic thinking

process. The effectiveness with which the organization is able to

identify, monitor, and assess critical external issues will impact upon

the information that goes into development of alternative strategies, the

evaluation of each alternative, the selection of a strategy, and its

implementation. What issues management really does relative to the

strategic planning process is to support it with updated and organized

Information on relevant external issues.

A second way in which one might view the link between strategic

planning and issues management is to consider issues management as an

alternative to the process of planning by formal organizational structure.

In many wayS, issues management objectives are similar to those of the matrix

Goalformulation

5

Goalstructure

Strategyformulation

Proposedstrategies

Strategychose "---P.

DIMemenIssues

Environmentalanalysis

Strategiccontrol

Strategyimplementation

Figure 1. Linkage between issues Management and StrategicManagement (Adapted from Schendel and Hofer,1979; p. 15).

Test ofconsistency

Performanceresults

6

planning structure or the strategic business unit (SBU). The criteria for

creating matrix structures or strategic business units usually resides in

external factors. POr example, the SBU planning structure "is an attempt

to segment a large and diverse business structure into planning units that

have control over most of the factors that affect the business strategy- -

for example, marketing, manufacturing, or technology" (Gluck, et al., 1980;

p. 16).

Traditional organizational structures based upon functional or product

classifications lead to administrative problems when faced with rapid

environmental and technological change, and product-market d'versity. This

has created the need for new planning structures that can cut'across tra-

ditional organizational boundaries and permit more systematic and flexible

organizational response-. (For a comprehensive examination of the role of

structure and process in strategic planning, see Galbraith and Nathanson,

1978.)

The issues management process' real strength lies in its ability to

get at issues that transcend traditional organizational boundaries, or

issues that necessitate cross-unit strategies. It is our belief that

planning by traditional organizational structure is necessary but can be

supplemented by the cross-unit planning which the issues management process

permits. This is particularly true when one is dealing with universities.

Most of the basic research occurs in disciplinary units, and degrees are

typically awarded by disciplines. Thus the technology, the productS,

and the traditions of universities make it necessary to preserve the

disciplinary structure, with very limited recourse for reorganization.

9

The issues management process is a good means of preserving the traditional

structure of universities while imbuing it with the advantages of cross-

organizational or cross-unit planning.

There is a third aspect to the link between issues management and

strategic planning. Much of human understanding is believed to occur through

symbolic processes (Morgan, 1980). The relationship of symbolism in the

strategic planning process becomes evident =If one combines Chaffee's

(1985) premise about strategy making being a sense-making exercise with

the observations of others that sense making a:d understanding occur

primarily through the use of symbols (Pondy, et al., 1983). Issues

management conveys to the members of the organization a clear message

that they should be attentive to these strategic issues, and that these

issues reflect the values and the direction of the organization. The

issues management process also has implication for the political dynamics

within the organization. According to Pfeffer (1981), "moving of formerly

ignored issues into the decision agenda permits the possible development of

coalitions and political bargaining within groups that might be interested

in the new issues" (p. 147).

Implementation

Since 1977, The Pennsylvania State University has had an on-going

planning and budgeting process that has reallocated approximately $20 million

internally to mandated cost increases and high priority programs (see

Lozier and Althouse, 1983). However, by 1983 it was clear that, although

the reallocation was considerable and had affected units differentially,

10

the University continued to make the budgeting adjustments largely at

the margins and in the absence of broad institutional direction. Longer-term

priorities needed to he established and we looked to strategic management

concepts, including, it turns out, issues management, to renew the planning

process.

A primary added dimension that strategic management introduces to

standard forecast-based financial planning is the greater attention given to

the assessment of the external environment. This attention is necessitated

by the current diversity, pace, and interconnectedness of change. As Ian

Wilson (1983) of SRI International has noted, "changing social values,

government regulations, and shifts in the energy and economic growth

equations are now also important factors in managerial decision making"

(p. 9-2). As noted above, environmental scanning is one aspect of a com-

prehensive issues management process, a necessary prelude to analysis

and action.

in a paper presented as part of this same Forum, Pflaum and Delmont

(1985) provided an enlightening and comprehensive look at the scope and

methodology of environmental scanning in the corporate, government, and

higher education sectors. We have not attempted to duplicate that

effort, but hope to supplement that discussion by summarizing Penn

State's experience with environmental scanning as a component of issues

management.

Tt seems to us that colleges and universities, especially the large

research universities, have a distinct advantage over the corporate sector

in that the comprehensive expertise needed to conduct environmental scans

resides within the organization. We also recognize the need to differentiate

he,,ween strategy levels and the fact that issues percolate up and down

the organization. Bourgeois (1980) writi2s of the general environment

issues that impact corporate strategy, ar" ' operating environment issues

that are more explicitly relevant to a parr'cular business strategy. This

distinction for the university translates into institution-wide issues and

college or department issues.

Accordingly, an early aspect of the strategic management process

developed for Penn State was the initiation of a macro-level external

assessment. The objectives of the assessment were two-fold: " 1) to examine ,

trends and issues likely to generate new or expanded opportunities or to

provide threats or constraints to existing structures, programs and philosophy,

and 2) to provide a context and direction for further micro-level external

assessments by lower level planning units." Sts assessment committees were

appointed--population trends; economic trends; federal and state policies;

societal, technological and scientific trends; graduate and research markets;

and changing higher education structures and competition. Over 60 faculty

and staff members consulted and worked for four months to TOoducL a

comprehensive report that became part of the University's Strategic Planning

Guide issued in the Fall of 1984. Figure 2 shows the matrix schedule that

was developed to compile this report.

insert Figure 2 about here

Environmental

Sector Factor/Trend

Economic

Clientele

CovernmentclPolicy

Federal

State

Opportunity or AffectedConstraint Decision Areas Observations

Rapid growth in manufacturing Opportunityand mining in developing andcountries Constraint

Deregulation .nd

divestiture

lagging support

Technology

Communications New devices and advance-ments in communicationstechnologies

Research

Competition "Isolated," rural

setting of main campus

Opportunityand

Constraint

Constraint

Opportunityand

Constraint

Constraint

EnrollmentCurriculumPrograms

Telecommunications

Institution-wideResearch

Inst

Research

CES

ProgramsPersonnelBudgetResearchIntercollege andintercampuscooperation

Mix of programs

Demand for technical training in engineering, mineral sciencesand sciences, business and theoretical and applied economicsis increasing for international students. Instability offoreign currencies is placing a hardship on nations to sendstudents abroad.

Higher access and traffic charges will increase theUniversity's costs of education and specific programs,especially research;.however, the increased competition mayresult in an improved long-run cost structure for Universityusers.

Reductions in library resources diminish the probability ofsecuring state-of-the-art computing, scientific andengineering equipment.

More flexibility for administrative and faculty consultation;savings in travel costs and personnel productivity /hours;requires familiarity with operation by personnel; inadequatereception at times; opportunities for long distance educationat the state, national, international level; opportunity forfaculty sharing; savings in faculty hours.

Less opportunity than some competitors to interact withindustry and othe.:! universities for joint research projects.

1-1O

Figure 2: Examples of external assessment matrix reporting schedule

1314

11

As colleges and other units of the University began to develop their own

strategic planning assessments, a starting point for many was to review these

matrices and identify and refine trends that had more explicit bearing upon

their particular units. In some instances, this refinement would demon-

strate that the trend either did not apply or even was quite the reverse at

the micro-level. The quality of the micro-level external assessment, and

its linkage to internal evaluations and unit priorities and goals, then became

a significant criterion .1.n the reviews of unit strategic plans. The importance

of the external assessments as a strategic planning issve in its own right was

emphasized by demonstrating its value through the macro-level assessment.

As part of the entire issues management domain, the external

assessment assists in raising the key issues that confront an

organization. Often these issues-are not-unit or-business specific, but

cross organizational boundaries. A limitation to a strategic planning

process that is bound to structure can be the inability to formulate

"tomorrow's concept of the business" (Gluck, et al.. 1980 p. 16). Issues

management, therefore, provides a planning structure around which strategic

thinking about an issue can be encouraged, less constrained by organizational

preconceptions of and alternative responses to the issue. At Penn State,

the mechanism adopted for dealing with cross-organizational issues was

the establishment by the Office of the President of strategic study

groups. Identification of what issues should result in the appointment

of,study groups is the product of matching the more systematic scanning

of the formal eternal environmental assessment and the critical sensing

of the President and Executive Vice President/Provost of issues and

opportunities that could be derailed or inadequately addressed by formal

structural planning in the colleges. The strategic study group becomes a

means, therefore, to manage the top priorities of the University's executives.

15

12

In contrast to the existing collegiate structure, study groups are "flexible

structures that can be adjusted and fine tuned by altering the power dis-

tribution of the existing roles" (Galbraith and Nathanson, 1978, p. 711).

To date, strategic planning groups have been appointed in the

following areas: (1) materials science; (2) academic computing; (3) mass

communications; (4) technology education; (5) management education; (6)

biotechnology; (7) enrollment management and (8) telecommunications. Each

group has received a specific charge that provides a preliminary assessment

of the issue and assigns the group members the responsibility for following

basic strategic management stages in the development of alternative

strategies and rLcommendations for the Office of the President.

One study group in particular--engineering technology--demonstrates

its relationship to the issues management process. The current adminis-

tration in Harrisburg has initiated the discussions that could lend to a

formal proposal to convert area vocational-technical schools (AVTCs) in

low population areas to technical institutes offering associate 'degrees.

Working through the independent Pennsylvania Association for Colleges and

Universities, Penn State has taken a leadership role to redirect attempts to

establish state policy that would expand post - secondary space and access at

a time when the prospective student age group is declining and state support

to existing public institutions is already underfunded.

At the same timc, Penn State has some in-house problems with its

associate degree engineering technology programs. Penn State, through its

17 branch Commonwealth Campuses, is the largest grantor in the country of

engineering associate degrees. The engineering technology study group was

appointed to reexamine curricular and personnel policy relationships between

the campus system and the College of Engineering. A preliminary report of the

1F

13

study group's findings and recommendations, aimed in part to improve the

University's.ability to respond to statewide associate degree career demands,

was made to the Board of Trustees at a special workshop. Attending the

session was the secretary of education, an ex-officio member of the Board

and the state administration's point persoi in the prospective proposal

regarding the AVTCs. Although the issue is still pending, a pro-active

issues management approachhas helped the UniveLsity monitor and influence

the likelihood of legislation before a formal bill is presented to the state

legislature.

Caveats and Implications

Penn State's experience with issues management and strategic planning/

management is in ad early stage of development. Preliminary strategic

plans from colleges and various support units were only received in March

and a complete tie-in to the University's planning and budgeting process will

only occur in the formulation of the 1986-87 and beyond fiscal years. The

fruits of the several study groups as reflected in change --organizational,

leadership, and/or resource reallocationare only just emerging in the

cases of three of the study groups. Yet, the dynamic aspect of strategic

planning requires that we examine and modify the process as we go along.

We raise several questions about the directions that certain aspects of

the process, in particular with respect to issues management, should take:

Issues management planning vs. organizational planning. As Penn State's

strategic planning process was being developed, several proponents of the

issues management approach to planning argued that no planning should be done

according to existing organizational alignments. They argued that only

conventional and not strategic thinking would he the result of this

traditional approach to planning. Strategic planning provides, however,

14

the link between strategy formulation, evaluation, and control on the one

hand, And general management functions such as the coordination of functional

area activities and the development of operating decisions on the other

(see Hofer, et al., 1980). It was determined that a process that was solely

issues management oriented would not establish that link to operational con-

cerns. For example, resources are allocated along functional lines and not

according to Issues. Hence, the process has to link issues management to the

on-going organizational strategic planning.

Managing the number of issues. Because issues management crosses unit

boundaries, strategy implementation is far more dependent upon top manage-

ment initiatives. This requires considerable time, energy, and good will

on the part of the executive leaders. The number of strategies that can

be pursued at this level are limited, suggesting that at any one time the

number of study groups, in Penn State's instance, from which recommendations

will be forthcoming should be controlled. It should be acknowledged that

prospective strategic study group issues do emerge from the plans of colleges

and other units. Also, formal proposals to establish specific study groups

have been made to the Office of the President. This reinforces, however,

the need to manage the process, including the number of issues.

Centralization vs. decentralization. Should the University insti-

tutionalize environmental scanning at the macro-level, or focus central

energies on promoting issue identification at the unit level? Having

completed an effective macro-level assessment, we are now grappling with

the next steps needed to facilitate on-going scanning. The annual planning

rounds scheduled through the University's strategic management process will

of necessity require unit level scanning. The trends for research funding

and federal policy vary considerably, for example, between the Colleges of.

Earth and Mineral Sciences and Business Administration. Is a regular or

15

periodic higher level scanning required? We believe it is and will be

working during 1985-86 to build upon the initial macro-level effort.

Issue legitimization. Effective leadership often knows well the

'issues that provide the greatest opportunities and constraints for a

university. Earlier in this paper we discussed the role of symbolism in

strategic planning and the need for acceptance of a decision agenda. We

believe that a formalized issues management program such as Penn State's

strategic study groups provides structure for the consultation and legiti-

mization of new directions that are part of the action plan of a college

or university chief executive officer.

Conclusions

We conclude our discussion with four observltIons regarding issues

management and strategic planning.. The first is to reiterate our view

that the concept of issues management is best understood in the context

of the broader process of strategic planning or management. A practical

concern for issues management is in adapting it to the planning

processes that are best for a given institution and its leadership

Second, much of the recent research and writing about higher

education organization and administration deals with various aspects of

"management science," e.g., strategic management, issues management, and

enrollment management. Despite the connotations conveyed by the term

management science, strategic planning and decision making are not a

science, in which we view planning as something to do right. Rather, we

must regard planning as an art, in which the emphasis is on doing the

right thing.

16

Third, as an art, effective planning is highly dependent upon

effective leadership. There is a strong relationship in the quality of

leadership and the ability to reach decisions regarding priorities and

strategies. In the absence of decisions, there is no payoff from

strategic planning; without leadership, decisions are not as likely to

be forthcoming.

Last, the purpose of strategic planning is to position our

institutions for the future. We are .less concerned about _predicting. the

future, and more aware of making decisions today so.that we may be where

we want to be tomorrow.

17

References

A&'tley, W. C. Issues managementnew tool for new times. Bank Marketing,

Augu.lt 1983, 10-14.

Bourgeois, L. J. Strategy and environment: a conceptual integration.Academy of Management Review, January, 1980, 25-39.

Chaffee, E. E. Three models of strategy. Academy of Management Review,10(1), 1985, 89-98.

Cyert, R. M., and March, J. G. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood

Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963.

_Dutton, -J -. and -Narayanan, V. . Toward -understanding strategic

issue diagnosis. Strategic Management Journal, 1983, 307-323.

Freeman, R. E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston:

Pitman, 1984.

Galbraith, J.. R., and Nathanson, D. A. Strategy Implementation: The

Role of Structure and Process. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company,1978.

Gluck, F. W., Kaufman, S. P., and Walleck, A. S. The four phases ofstrategic management. Harvard Business Review, July-August, 1980,9-21.

flofer, C. W., Murray, Jr., E. A., Charan, R., and Pitts, R. A. StrategicManagement: A Casebopk in Policy and Planning. St. Paul, MN: WestPublishing Company, 1980.

Lozier, G. C., and Althouse, P. R. Developing planning and budgetingstrategies for internal recycling of-funds. Research in HigherEducation, 18(2), 1983, 237-250.

March, J. G., and Simon, H. A. Organization, %7 York: Wiley, 1958.

Morgan, G. Paradigms, metaphors and puzzle solving in organizationtheory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 1980, 605-622.

Pfeffer, J. Power in Organizations. Marshfield, Mass.: Pittman, 1981.

Pflaum, A. M. and Delmont, T. J. External scanning in public and privateorganizations: implications for strategic management in highereducation. Paper presented at the Twenty-Fifth Annual Forum of theAssociation for Institutional Research, Portland, OR: April-May, 1985.

Pondy, L. R., Frost, P. J., Morgan, G., and Dandridge, T. C. (Eds.).Organizational Symbolism. Greenwich, CN: JAI Press, 1983.

21

18

Schendel, D. E. and Ili)fer, C. W. (Eds.) Strategic Management: A New

View of Business Policy and Planning. Boston: Little, Brown and

Company, 1979.

Tversky, A., and Kahnetnan, D. Causal schemata in judgments under uncertainty.Tn M. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in Social Psychology. Hillsdale, N.J.:

Frlbaum, 1980, 49-72.

Wilson, I. The benefits of environmental analysis. Tn K. J. Albert (Ed.),

The Strategic Management Handbook, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983, 9-1 to

9-19.